Verona Murphy

The Taoiseach to respond.

I thank the Taoiseach. I call Deputy Burke.

I call Deputy Graves.

The Deputy is over time.

I must now deal with a deferred division relating to the Second Reading motion on the International Protection Bill 2026, taken on Thursday, 12 February. On the question, "That the Bill be now read a Second Time", a division was claimed and in accordance with Standing Order 85(2), that division must be taken now.

Amendments Nos. 2 to 4, inclusive, are related and will be discussed together.

Before I move to the Minister of State, I remind Members we should try to keep the debate to discussion of the amendments proposed. I know we have eight hours but I say this given the controversy raised last week with regard to Committee Stage and how nobody should be, I suppose, taking advantage of the time.

Could the Deputy repeat that, please?

Deputy, please speak to the amendment.

It must be relevant to the amendment.

Are there any further Members? If it is relevant, Deputy Ó Súilleabháin.

It is not relevant, Deputy, because deportation is not mentioned in the amendment.

I am afraid it is not. It is not relevant to this amendment.

It may be relevant to the other amendments but we are sticking to the amendments. I call Deputy Gannon.

Amendment No. 6 has been ruled out of order.

It has been explained, Deputy. It carries a potential charge on revenue and unless he can dispel that, I am afraid it is out of order.

I will read the note for the Deputy. It states: "Amendment No. 6 would insert a new definition for legal counselling, a term used later in the Bill, but this definition would provide that such services be provided to persons without charge to the applicant, irrespective of a person's ability to secure legal services by their own means." Unfortunately, that is where the money message comes in. It h…

The reason that amendment No. 6 is ruled out of order is that at paragraph (c), it states, "without charge to the applicant". Amendment No. 7 is somewhat more nuanced or ambiguous.

Relevance, Deputy.

I will clarify again the reasoning behind the ruling out of order of Deputy Gannon's amendment. Deputy Kelly clearly did not get that part (c) of Deputy Gannon's-----

No, I think it is important for-----

No, I am explaining because Deputy Kelly said that he cannot understand.

For the benefit of new Members, Deputy Gannon's amendment expressly states "without charge to the applicant", which means that it creates a money message.

We can get to that, absolutely. I have explained the reason. There is no such expression in amendment No. 7, in the name of Deputy Carthy.

Does the Minister wish to respond?